Helm v. Maryland Casualty Co.
This text of 273 A.D. 800 (Helm v. Maryland Casualty Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: We conclude that facts sufficient to state a cause of action are alleged in the first cause of action in plaintiff’s complaint. It is unnecessary, therefore, to pass upon the second cause of action (Eidlitz v. Fischback & Moore, Inc., 239 App. [801]*801Div. 483, 486). All concur. (The order denies defendant’s motion to dismiss the first and second causes of action in plaintiff’s complaint in an action to recover the balance of a judgment secured by plaintiff in an automobile negligence action.) Present — Harris, McCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
273 A.D. 800, 76 N.Y.S.2d 438, 1947 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/helm-v-maryland-casualty-co-nyappdiv-1947.